Official Luthiers Forum!

A friend asked my opinion about the sound hole on his 1940 J-45, it is badly damaged from years of pick activity. He is concerned about the thin wood splitting and maybe breaking off. The guitar is otherwise in excellent condition, having just had a neck reset.



The pick guard is probably original. I can think of several things that might stabilize the wood and maybe protect if from further damage but I don't want to do anything that would compromise the value or collectability of the guitar. Suggestions?

The only cosmetic fix that occurs to me would be to rout some height out the band of spruce between inner rosette edge and sound hole, inlay a ring of spruce with a close grain match, level it, then color and finish work. Or maybe you could excavate and replace just the damaged section.

Either way seems like a difficult, big, expensive job, and would potentially impact the originality so I instead would consider leaving the “mojo” as is, add some well concealed internal reinforcement of the thinnest areas followed by some discussions with the owner about the necessity of modifying their technique to avoid worsening the damage. It’s entirely possible to play a guitar with a pick for decades without tearing up the soundhole edge that badly.

I'll second Josh on the reinforcement of the underside, and urge the client to change his evil ways.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

I've considered brushing a little hide glue or thin CA on the damaged area. I like the idea of the CA better but hesitate on a vintage instrument like this.

And the owner knows he was at fault - said for many years he used metal finger picks. Says he has seen the light but the damage is done.

I would not change a thing and anything you do does risk compromising the originality and ultimately the value. It is what it is and and speaks of a great guitar that someone enjoys the hell out of playing.

Think Willie Nelson and Trigger. There is stabilization there but it was necessary or the thing would have imploded. This is largely cosmetic and not structural.

This is not directed at anyone here but vintage guitars and orchids and most houseplants all suffer from the same thing, people not leaving then the hell alone and intervening too much and too often.

Freeman what year is this one? It's cool, I want it.

According to the owner it is 1940. He has owned it for a very long time and admits that it was probably he that did the damage. Its a pretty remarkable guitars and no, you can't have it.

The guitar world is a strange place. If this was a 400 year old Cremonese violin with similar f-hole damage, a quality repair would be desired and accepted with no loss of value.

Meanwhile, carefully replace a totally destroyed bridge plate in an old D18 or defective electronic component in a 52 tele and you’ve committed a capital crime

I'll bite my tongue (and put away my pencil) and not speak to judges of authenticity. If the guitar was mine I'd run some CA around the damaged area to keep the damage limited and less likely to spread. And I'd change my shredding ways.

_________________
Peter Havriluk

LOL darn I wanted it. So it's valuable and vintage and that means hands off unless it's necessary to keep it singing, generally speaking.

I would leave it alone and it does not matter who damaged it or the the player damaged it at all. This is now part of the history of the instrument and it's authenticity and messing with it is not a good idea.

Great guitar by the way, bet it sounds killer flat picked hard.

And you may find that in the description of this instrument at a quality seller like some of the big names who I won't name here that they will say that a repair was made by the owner that did not stop further damage and the owner should not have squirted CA all over an instrument that was built before CA was invented.

Asking a player to change their technique is over the top. I'm very known to say things to clients that other people won't say.... an understatement but I would never tell an artist that they need to change anything. That's out of my lane. My lane is to repair guitars AND do no harm (to the instrument not the human ).

So not trying to argue with you but vintage instruments are handled pretty much hands off with repairs only being necessary really when they are either structurally essential, cosmetically very correct and also necessary and necessary to keep it playing well such as fret work, crack repairs, neck resets. In fact even cosmetic repairs if only for cosmetic reasons will be pointed out as not original and possibly cast doubt on the price to be charged/gained for the instrument if the repair work is not stellar. When repairs are justified vintage correct, period correct is desirable.

I am surprised as well at how many people here seem to think that the sky is falling because of pick wear. This is what a great, a great old guitar can commonly look like. The best ones get played the most and look like this often. It's not all that unusual, it's expect, it is what it is, leave it alone.